<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Another Puzzle</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.buccaneerscholar.com/blog/archives/132/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.buccaneerscholar.com/blog/archives/132</link>
	<description>Field Notes From a Buccaneer-Scholar</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Nov 2011 18:23:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Alex Rotaru</title>
		<link>http://www.buccaneerscholar.com/blog/archives/132/comment-page-1#comment-312</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex Rotaru</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Dec 2010 06:51:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buccaneerscholar.com/blog/?p=132#comment-312</guid>
		<description>First I checked to see if there&#039;s any connection between the even and odd numbers, but I didn&#039;t notice anything.

Then I checked to see if I can find a connection to the ascending / descending order of the numbers, but I didn&#039;t notice anything

Then I summed the digits of each number and noticed that sum(3rd)=sum(9th), sum(4th)=sum(10th), sum(5th)=sum(11), but all the other pairs didn&#039;t match, so I dropped this path too

I noticed that 77=7x11, then I looked at 341. I know that only 1x1 and 3x7 give a 1 and I found out that 341 = 31x11. 
Then I though to divide 923 to 13 (which in my mind was 31 inverted) =&gt; 923 = 71x13
Then I divided 1547 to 17 (71 inverted)=&gt; 1547 = 91x17. I was surprise to see that my theory was valid so far, so I continued :)
        608 = 32x19
        2116 = 92x23
        377 = 13x29
        2263 = 73x31
        518 = 14x37
        1394 = 34x41
        3182 = 74x43
        1645 = 35x47
Following the above reasoning I though that the 13th number has to be a multiple of 53 =&gt; 13th = Zx53. Then I thought that 944 should be a multiple of Z inverted. 
While trying to think of a solution for this number, I noticed that 7, 11, 19, 23, ..., 43, 47, 53 are the prime numbers in ascending order, so 944 should be a multiple of 59 (944 = 16x59).

Knowing that the 13th number is a multiple of 53 and that 944 is a multiple of 59 =&gt; 13th number is 5035 = 95x53.

Thank you for the puzzle. It was a nice way to start my day :).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>First I checked to see if there&#8217;s any connection between the even and odd numbers, but I didn&#8217;t notice anything.</p>
<p>Then I checked to see if I can find a connection to the ascending / descending order of the numbers, but I didn&#8217;t notice anything</p>
<p>Then I summed the digits of each number and noticed that sum(3rd)=sum(9th), sum(4th)=sum(10th), sum(5th)=sum(11), but all the other pairs didn&#8217;t match, so I dropped this path too</p>
<p>I noticed that 77=7&#215;11, then I looked at 341. I know that only 1&#215;1 and 3&#215;7 give a 1 and I found out that 341 = 31&#215;11.<br />
Then I though to divide 923 to 13 (which in my mind was 31 inverted) =&gt; 923 = 71&#215;13<br />
Then I divided 1547 to 17 (71 inverted)=&gt; 1547 = 91&#215;17. I was surprise to see that my theory was valid so far, so I continued <img src='http://www.buccaneerscholar.com/blog/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /><br />
        608 = 32&#215;19<br />
        2116 = 92&#215;23<br />
        377 = 13&#215;29<br />
        2263 = 73&#215;31<br />
        518 = 14&#215;37<br />
        1394 = 34&#215;41<br />
        3182 = 74&#215;43<br />
        1645 = 35&#215;47<br />
Following the above reasoning I though that the 13th number has to be a multiple of 53 =&gt; 13th = Zx53. Then I thought that 944 should be a multiple of Z inverted.<br />
While trying to think of a solution for this number, I noticed that 7, 11, 19, 23, &#8230;, 43, 47, 53 are the prime numbers in ascending order, so 944 should be a multiple of 59 (944 = 16&#215;59).</p>
<p>Knowing that the 13th number is a multiple of 53 and that 944 is a multiple of 59 =&gt; 13th number is 5035 = 95&#215;53.</p>
<p>Thank you for the puzzle. It was a nice way to start my day <img src='http://www.buccaneerscholar.com/blog/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> .</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eusebiu Blindu</title>
		<link>http://www.buccaneerscholar.com/blog/archives/132/comment-page-1#comment-310</link>
		<dc:creator>Eusebiu Blindu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Jul 2010 15:28:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buccaneerscholar.com/blog/?p=132#comment-310</guid>
		<description>You can try another one here:

  http://www.testalways.com/2010/07/09/160/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You can try another one here:</p>
<p>  <a href="http://www.testalways.com/2010/07/09/160/" rel="nofollow">http://www.testalways.com/2010/07/09/160/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lance</title>
		<link>http://www.buccaneerscholar.com/blog/archives/132/comment-page-1#comment-307</link>
		<dc:creator>Lance</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Apr 2010 18:19:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buccaneerscholar.com/blog/?p=132#comment-307</guid>
		<description>So, should the first three numbers in the sequence be 6, 15, and 35 ?  :)
&lt;em&gt;
[James&#039; Reply: All you need to tell me is the missing number.]&lt;/em&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So, should the first three numbers in the sequence be 6, 15, and 35 ?  <img src='http://www.buccaneerscholar.com/blog/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /><br />
<em><br />
[James' Reply: All you need to tell me is the missing number.]</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adam</title>
		<link>http://www.buccaneerscholar.com/blog/archives/132/comment-page-1#comment-306</link>
		<dc:creator>Adam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Mar 2010 00:00:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buccaneerscholar.com/blog/?p=132#comment-306</guid>
		<description>That didn&#039;t paste so well -

for n in 77 341 923 1547 608 2116 377 2263 518 1394 3182 1645 944 4636; do echo &quot;Testing $n...&quot; &gt;&gt; out; for ((a=2;a&gt; out; fi; done; done;

was the bash command :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That didn&#8217;t paste so well -</p>
<p>for n in 77 341 923 1547 608 2116 377 2263 518 1394 3182 1645 944 4636; do echo &#8220;Testing $n&#8230;&#8221; &gt;&gt; out; for ((a=2;a&gt; out; fi; done; done;</p>
<p>was the bash command <img src='http://www.buccaneerscholar.com/blog/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adam</title>
		<link>http://www.buccaneerscholar.com/blog/archives/132/comment-page-1#comment-305</link>
		<dc:creator>Adam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Mar 2010 23:59:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buccaneerscholar.com/blog/?p=132#comment-305</guid>
		<description>I first starting by summing the individual digits to see if any patterns emerged. Failing to see any, I wanted to see what kind of factors I was dealing with. I used the following bash command and then looked at  the output.

for n in 77 341 923 1547 608 2116 377 2263 518 1394 3182 1645 944 4636; do echo &quot;Testing $n...&quot; &gt;&gt; out; for ((a=2;a&gt; out; fi; done; done;

The beginning of the &quot;out&quot; file looked like this:

Testing 77...
7
11
Testing 341...
11
31
Testing 923...
13
71
Testing 1547...
7
13
17
91
119
221

It was somewhat obvious that primes were involved. Looking at the factors laid out in this fashion actually made it simpler to recognize the reversal pattern. &quot;Hmm, 31 and then 13; 71 and then look, 17; There must be something to this reversal.&quot;

After going through the rest of the list and looking at the common elements from number to number in the sequence, I found this to be ascending primes, with the higher number prime reversed.

So, missing number is: 5035.

Cool puzzle! Also, very interesting to read everyone&#039;s approaches and thoughts. 

Keep these coming!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I first starting by summing the individual digits to see if any patterns emerged. Failing to see any, I wanted to see what kind of factors I was dealing with. I used the following bash command and then looked at  the output.</p>
<p>for n in 77 341 923 1547 608 2116 377 2263 518 1394 3182 1645 944 4636; do echo &#8220;Testing $n&#8230;&#8221; &gt;&gt; out; for ((a=2;a&gt; out; fi; done; done;</p>
<p>The beginning of the &#8220;out&#8221; file looked like this:</p>
<p>Testing 77&#8230;<br />
7<br />
11<br />
Testing 341&#8230;<br />
11<br />
31<br />
Testing 923&#8230;<br />
13<br />
71<br />
Testing 1547&#8230;<br />
7<br />
13<br />
17<br />
91<br />
119<br />
221</p>
<p>It was somewhat obvious that primes were involved. Looking at the factors laid out in this fashion actually made it simpler to recognize the reversal pattern. &#8220;Hmm, 31 and then 13; 71 and then look, 17; There must be something to this reversal.&#8221;</p>
<p>After going through the rest of the list and looking at the common elements from number to number in the sequence, I found this to be ascending primes, with the higher number prime reversed.</p>
<p>So, missing number is: 5035.</p>
<p>Cool puzzle! Also, very interesting to read everyone&#8217;s approaches and thoughts. </p>
<p>Keep these coming!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JMike</title>
		<link>http://www.buccaneerscholar.com/blog/archives/132/comment-page-1#comment-304</link>
		<dc:creator>JMike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Mar 2010 19:30:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buccaneerscholar.com/blog/?p=132#comment-304</guid>
		<description>After reading the other comments, I am of course shamed and horrified to have missed such an easy insight.

Something I want to point out that&#039;s similar to that other numeric problem you posted a while ago: the thing that I&#039;m really interested in, and wish I understood further, is what lies behind that initial insight that causes the problem to open (most of) its guts to you.  I looked at this problem, and by the time I was aware of having thoughts about it, the little subvocalization thread over there in the back of my head was saying &quot;look at the prime factorization of the numbers&quot;.  (a) How did it do that, and (b) how did it do that in such a way that &quot;the rest of me&quot; was taken by surprise?  That&#039;s the real thing, to me anyway.  The rest is just working out the details.  (And I&#039;m aware of throwing in the word &quot;just&quot; there in a way that I shouldn&#039;t, cf. either Gerald Weinberg or Robert Pirsig or both.)

&lt;i&gt;[James&#039; Reply: You seemed to have gone right to the factorization. I wandered through several other by-ways, first, before I remembered that Trey had once before hit me with a factors problem, so I visited easycalculation.com and played with prime factors.

Nothing looked strange except 11 showing up as a factor in the first two terms, and 71 and 17 seeming interesting because they were reversed.

A few minutes later the pattern clicked.

I think for me, it&#039;s like this: I visit specific patterns I&#039;ve seen before. If those don&#039;t work, break it down with some common forms of analysis (deltas, scatterplots, cycles, and visiting the Online Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences), looking for things that seem like repetitions or strange consistencies.]&lt;/i&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>After reading the other comments, I am of course shamed and horrified to have missed such an easy insight.</p>
<p>Something I want to point out that&#8217;s similar to that other numeric problem you posted a while ago: the thing that I&#8217;m really interested in, and wish I understood further, is what lies behind that initial insight that causes the problem to open (most of) its guts to you.  I looked at this problem, and by the time I was aware of having thoughts about it, the little subvocalization thread over there in the back of my head was saying &#8220;look at the prime factorization of the numbers&#8221;.  (a) How did it do that, and (b) how did it do that in such a way that &#8220;the rest of me&#8221; was taken by surprise?  That&#8217;s the real thing, to me anyway.  The rest is just working out the details.  (And I&#8217;m aware of throwing in the word &#8220;just&#8221; there in a way that I shouldn&#8217;t, cf. either Gerald Weinberg or Robert Pirsig or both.)</p>
<p><i>[James' Reply: You seemed to have gone right to the factorization. I wandered through several other by-ways, first, before I remembered that Trey had once before hit me with a factors problem, so I visited easycalculation.com and played with prime factors.</p>
<p>Nothing looked strange except 11 showing up as a factor in the first two terms, and 71 and 17 seeming interesting because they were reversed.</p>
<p>A few minutes later the pattern clicked.</p>
<p>I think for me, it's like this: I visit specific patterns I've seen before. If those don't work, break it down with some common forms of analysis (deltas, scatterplots, cycles, and visiting the Online Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences), looking for things that seem like repetitions or strange consistencies.]</i></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JMike</title>
		<link>http://www.buccaneerscholar.com/blog/archives/132/comment-page-1#comment-303</link>
		<dc:creator>JMike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Mar 2010 19:23:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buccaneerscholar.com/blog/?p=132#comment-303</guid>
		<description>first random idea: reduce numbers to prime factors (since 77 = 7 * 11 and 341 = 31 * 11 and that looks too interesting to be accidental)
77 = 7*11
341 = 31 * 11
923 = 13 * 71
1547 = 17 * 91
608 = 19 * 2^5    wow, that&#039;ll screw things up
2116 = 2^2 * 23^2
377 = 13*29

ok, so I think this prime fatorization thing is going somewhere, let&#039;s keep going

2263 = 31*73
518 = 2 * 7 * 39
1394 = 2 * 17 * 41
3182 = 2 * 37 * 43
1645 = 5 * 7 * 47

----------

heyyy .. 13, 17, 19, 23, 29, 31, 29, 41, 43, 47 - those are prime numbers in sequence - embarrassing that it took me this long to see it

944 = 2^4 * 59
4636 = 61 * 2^2 * 19


So the blank is going to be 53 times something.  what&#039;s the something?

11
31
71
91
2^5 = 32
2^2*23 = 92
13
73
2*7 = 14
2*17 = 34
2*37 = 74
5*7 = 35
______
2^4 = 16
2^2*19 = 76

wellll, OK, that&#039;s a pattern on the units digit preceded by an odd number.  So the blank should be either 55, 75, or 95.  75 = 3*5*5*5 which just looks different from the rest, eh?  So I guess it&#039;s between 55 = 5*11, which has the problem that the first digit is &#039;5&#039; which doesn&#039;t happen elsewhere in the pattern, and 95 = 5*19.

I&#039;ve spent 10-12 minutes on this and I don&#039;t think I&#039;m going to get any closer than that it&#039;s either 53 * 55 or 53 * 95 and it seems like 53 * 95 = 5035 is slightly better.

Now I&#039;m going to read the other comments :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>first random idea: reduce numbers to prime factors (since 77 = 7 * 11 and 341 = 31 * 11 and that looks too interesting to be accidental)<br />
77 = 7*11<br />
341 = 31 * 11<br />
923 = 13 * 71<br />
1547 = 17 * 91<br />
608 = 19 * 2^5    wow, that&#8217;ll screw things up<br />
2116 = 2^2 * 23^2<br />
377 = 13*29</p>
<p>ok, so I think this prime fatorization thing is going somewhere, let&#8217;s keep going</p>
<p>2263 = 31*73<br />
518 = 2 * 7 * 39<br />
1394 = 2 * 17 * 41<br />
3182 = 2 * 37 * 43<br />
1645 = 5 * 7 * 47</p>
<p>&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;-</p>
<p>heyyy .. 13, 17, 19, 23, 29, 31, 29, 41, 43, 47 &#8211; those are prime numbers in sequence &#8211; embarrassing that it took me this long to see it</p>
<p>944 = 2^4 * 59<br />
4636 = 61 * 2^2 * 19</p>
<p>So the blank is going to be 53 times something.  what&#8217;s the something?</p>
<p>11<br />
31<br />
71<br />
91<br />
2^5 = 32<br />
2^2*23 = 92<br />
13<br />
73<br />
2*7 = 14<br />
2*17 = 34<br />
2*37 = 74<br />
5*7 = 35<br />
______<br />
2^4 = 16<br />
2^2*19 = 76</p>
<p>wellll, OK, that&#8217;s a pattern on the units digit preceded by an odd number.  So the blank should be either 55, 75, or 95.  75 = 3*5*5*5 which just looks different from the rest, eh?  So I guess it&#8217;s between 55 = 5*11, which has the problem that the first digit is &#8216;5&#8242; which doesn&#8217;t happen elsewhere in the pattern, and 95 = 5*19.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve spent 10-12 minutes on this and I don&#8217;t think I&#8217;m going to get any closer than that it&#8217;s either 53 * 55 or 53 * 95 and it seems like 53 * 95 = 5035 is slightly better.</p>
<p>Now I&#8217;m going to read the other comments <img src='http://www.buccaneerscholar.com/blog/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mohit Verma</title>
		<link>http://www.buccaneerscholar.com/blog/archives/132/comment-page-1#comment-302</link>
		<dc:creator>Mohit Verma</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Mar 2010 09:29:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buccaneerscholar.com/blog/?p=132#comment-302</guid>
		<description>Another thing I noticed - the prime numbers. They are appearing in order like 7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23....after 47 it must be 53 and then second multiple was reverse of next prime number i.e. reverse of 59.

With Regards
Mohit Verma</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Another thing I noticed &#8211; the prime numbers. They are appearing in order like 7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23&#8230;.after 47 it must be 53 and then second multiple was reverse of next prime number i.e. reverse of 59.</p>
<p>With Regards<br />
Mohit Verma</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mohit Verma</title>
		<link>http://www.buccaneerscholar.com/blog/archives/132/comment-page-1#comment-301</link>
		<dc:creator>Mohit Verma</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Mar 2010 09:06:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buccaneerscholar.com/blog/?p=132#comment-301</guid>
		<description>Respected Sir,

On the basis of my calculations the answer is 5035.

My Approach: I started with playing with numbers. I tried different mathematical operator to get some meaningful result but failed. I was gazing at numbers with hope that they would give some hint and they did. After watching the number, I decided to find the factors of each number in the series and here the answer was lying.

After factorization it looks like:
77 = 7*11,
341 =11*31,
923 = 13 * 71,
1547 = 17 * 91,
608 =  19 * 32,
2116 =  23*92,
377 = 29 * 13,
2263 =  31 * 73,
518 =  37 * 14,
1394 =  41 * 34,
3182 =  43 * 74,
1645 =  47 * 35,
x = y * z,
944 = 59 * 16,
4636 =  61 * 76

After getting this, it was easy to find y and z. y is reverse of second factor of previous number and z is the reverse of first factor of next number. Hence in the case y = 53 and z = 95 so x = 5035.

I am sure I got the right answer but still waiting for your approval.

With Regards
Mohit Verma

&lt;i&gt;[James&#039; Reply: Good job, Mohit. You are correct. Ah the power of play!]&lt;/i&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Respected Sir,</p>
<p>On the basis of my calculations the answer is 5035.</p>
<p>My Approach: I started with playing with numbers. I tried different mathematical operator to get some meaningful result but failed. I was gazing at numbers with hope that they would give some hint and they did. After watching the number, I decided to find the factors of each number in the series and here the answer was lying.</p>
<p>After factorization it looks like:<br />
77 = 7*11,<br />
341 =11*31,<br />
923 = 13 * 71,<br />
1547 = 17 * 91,<br />
608 =  19 * 32,<br />
2116 =  23*92,<br />
377 = 29 * 13,<br />
2263 =  31 * 73,<br />
518 =  37 * 14,<br />
1394 =  41 * 34,<br />
3182 =  43 * 74,<br />
1645 =  47 * 35,<br />
x = y * z,<br />
944 = 59 * 16,<br />
4636 =  61 * 76</p>
<p>After getting this, it was easy to find y and z. y is reverse of second factor of previous number and z is the reverse of first factor of next number. Hence in the case y = 53 and z = 95 so x = 5035.</p>
<p>I am sure I got the right answer but still waiting for your approval.</p>
<p>With Regards<br />
Mohit Verma</p>
<p><i>[James' Reply: Good job, Mohit. You are correct. Ah the power of play!]</i></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Zac Thompson</title>
		<link>http://www.buccaneerscholar.com/blog/archives/132/comment-page-1#comment-298</link>
		<dc:creator>Zac Thompson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Mar 2010 03:40:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buccaneerscholar.com/blog/?p=132#comment-298</guid>
		<description>Oh, I see.  It&#039;s just adjacent primes with the digits of the larger one reversed.  Much simpler.  The missing multiples of 3 should have helped me there, along with the first digit being relatively prime to 10.  49 is composite, so 94 is not used as a factor.  The missing number is still 5035, of course.  Good puzzle.

Lots of cool puzzles in the archives of the WPC here:  
http://wpc.puzzles.com/history/index.htm

&lt;i&gt;[James&#039; reply: Excellent! Yeah you were just one tiny insight short. When I solved it, I noticed the reversal once I separated the factors, but only for the first two terms, because after that there were too many factors. But when I thought to combine the factors other than the consecutive primes together that part of the pattern became clear.]&lt;/i&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, I see.  It&#8217;s just adjacent primes with the digits of the larger one reversed.  Much simpler.  The missing multiples of 3 should have helped me there, along with the first digit being relatively prime to 10.  49 is composite, so 94 is not used as a factor.  The missing number is still 5035, of course.  Good puzzle.</p>
<p>Lots of cool puzzles in the archives of the WPC here:<br />
<a href="http://wpc.puzzles.com/history/index.htm" rel="nofollow">http://wpc.puzzles.com/history/index.htm</a></p>
<p><i>[James' reply: Excellent! Yeah you were just one tiny insight short. When I solved it, I noticed the reversal once I separated the factors, but only for the first two terms, because after that there were too many factors. But when I thought to combine the factors other than the consecutive primes together that part of the pattern became clear.]</i></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

